our charge
play

Our Charge The task force is hereby authorized and directed to - PDF document

ALABAMA JUVENILE JUSTICE TASK FORCE Our Charge The task force is hereby authorized and directed to study, evaluate, and analyze, a comprehensive review of the state's juvenile justice system and, using a data-driven approach, develop


  1. ALABAMA JUVENILE JUSTICE TASK FORCE Our Charge “The task force is hereby authorized and directed to study, evaluate, and analyze, a comprehensive review of the state's juvenile justice system and, using a data-driven approach, develop evidence-based policy recommendations for legislative consideration that will accomplish the following: Protect public safety; • • Hold juvenile offenders accountable; Contain costs; • Improve outcomes for youth, families, and communities • in Alabama.” 1

  2. Timeline and Process •Data Analysis June- August •System Assessment •Research Review •Data Follow-Up September •Policy Development Stakeholder •Subgroups Engagement •Subgroups October •Policy Development •Policy Consensus •Policy Consensus November •Final Report Agenda 1. Roundtable Findings Discussion 2. Follow-Up Data Analysis 3. Research Presentation 4. Lunch Break 5. Discussion of Research Principles/Policy Implications and Alabama Key Takeaways 2

  3. Stakeholder Roundtables Completed Completed Upcoming Roundtables Roundtables Roundtables  Detention June  Defense July directors 15 counsel 25, 26  Families TBD  DYS July July  Juvenile judges contracted 10 26 providers Diversion  July Aug. program DYS youth   Prosecutors TBD 12 17, 22 providers Detention   County July Aug. youth and  Crime Victims, commissioners 17 17, 30 staff Survivors and Sept. 26 July Advocates Youth and Aug.  21, Youth in  families 17 Aug.  Educators TBD facilities 17, 22, Aug. Sheriffs  30 23 July Mental  Probation  Aug. 25, 27, health officers 21 Aug. 8 providers Follow-Up Data Analysis Alabama Juvenile Justice Task Force September 6, 2017 3

  4. Data Follow-Up 7 On average, youth with court costs owe $221 per petition Average Total Court Costs Per Petition (Fines & Fees) $300 $250 $220 $221 $200 $150 $100 $50 $0 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 8 4

  5. On average, youth with restitution owe $868 per petition Average Total Restitution Per Petition $2,000 $1,500 $1,000 $1,029 $868 $500 $0 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 9 18% of petitions have court costs ordered, increased from 7% of petitions in 2007 Percentage of Petitions with Court Costs vs. Restitution 50% 40% 30% 18% 20% 10% 7% 4% 2% 0% 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Percentage of Petitions with Court Costs Percentage of Petitions with Restitution 10 5

  6. Court costs average $173 per truancy petition, even higher for misdemeanors Top 10 Offenses with Court Costs, 2016 % All Petitions Average Total Owed Offense with Court Costs in Court Costs Felony? (2016) Per Petition 1 CHINS / Truancy 15% $173 2 Unauthorized Use of A Vehicle 7% $195 ✓ 3 Unlawful Poss. of Marijuana – 2 nd 6% $240 4 Technical Violation / Delinquent 6% $198 5 Disorderly Conduct 6% $204 6 Harassment 6% $205 7 Illegal Poss. of Prescription Drug 5% $201 8 Assault – 3 rd 5% $331 9 Theft of Property – 2 rd 5% $185 ✓ 10 Harassment 3% $190 TOTAL 2,954 $219 11 Wide regional variation in average total court costs per petition Average Total Court Costs Per Petition Among Top 10 Counties in Complaints, 2016 % Youth % All Petitions Average Total Owed County Population with Court Costs in Court Costs (2015) (2016) Per Petition 1 Mobile 9% 15% $195 2 Jefferson 13% 0% $52 3 Madison 7% 10% $165 4 Montgomery 5% 4% $116 5 Baldwin 4% 9% $283 6 Morgan 3% 6% $236 7 Cullman 2% 1% $459 8 Talladega 2% 1% $46 9 Houston 2% 6% $269 10 Tuscaloosa 4% 3% $88 TOTAL 504,235 3,275 $221 12 6

  7. Four of the top 10 offenses with restitution costs are low level; many average near or over $1,000 per petition Top 10 Offenses with Restitution Costs, 2016 % All Petitions Average Total Owed Offense with Restitution in Restitution Felony? (2016) Per Petition 1 Burglary – 3 rd ✓ 17% $895 2 Criminal Mischief – 3 rd 15% $558 3 Unauthorized Use of A Vehicle 10% $417 ✓ 4 Theft of Property – 1 st 9% $1,788 ✓ 5 Criminal Mischief – 2 nd 9% $776 6 Criminal Mischief – 1 st 7% $1,224 ✓ 7 Theft of Property – 3 rd 7% $313 ✓ 8 Assault – 3 rd 5% $1,679 9 Theft of Property – 2 nd 3% $965 ✓ 10 Harassment 2% $674 TOTAL 575 $889 13 Wide regional variation in average total restitution per petition Average Total Restitution Per Petition Among Top 10 Counties in Complaints, 2016 % Youth % All Petitions Average Total Owed County Population with Restitution in Restitution (2015) (2016) Per Petition 1 Mobile 9% 18% $691 2 Jefferson 13% 8% $1,241 3 Madison 7% 0% $100 4 Montgomery 5% 10% $1,015 5 Baldwin 4% 5% $705 6 Morgan 3% 2% $1,031 7 Cullman 2% 1% $3,382 8 Talladega 2% 3% $507 9 Houston 2% 1% $958 10 Tuscaloosa 4% 3% $526 TOTAL 504,235 662 $868 14 7

  8. Most youth are unable to meet financial obligations, particularly for court costs Percentage of Court Costs Paid vs. Percentage of Restitution Paid 50% 40% 30% 20% 15% 15% 10% 6% 5% 0% 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Court Costs Paid Restitution Paid 15 Data Follow-Up Key Takeaways • The percentage of petitions with court costs has more than doubled over the past decade, increasing from 7% of petitions in 2007 to 18% in 2017 – On average, youth with court costs owe $221 per petition, including fines and fees – Court costs for truancy average $173 per petition • Most youth are unable to pay court costs, as only about 5% of court costs are collected by the court • There is wide county variation in both the prevalence of court costs and the amounts ordered • On average, youth with restitution owe $868 per petition, but only 15% of restitution is collected by the court 16 8

  9. Overall Key Takeaways Drivers Analysis and System Assessment 17 Overall Key Takeaways: System Assessment Presentation 1 • Decision-making – State law requires court referral for certain school-based behaviors and mandates prosecution of parents in certain circumstances • Local interpretations of statue may vary and lead to disparate responses to similar school-based behaviors – There is variation across the state in which offenses are eligible for informal adjustments and what conditions are applied – Limited statutory criteria and local interpretation allow inconsistent detention practices • There is no statewide funding stream for alternatives to detention pre-adjudication – JPOs report divergent eligibility criteria for consent decrees and inconsistent practices for issuing fees 18 9

  10. Overall Key Takeaways: System Assessment Presentation 1 • Youth flow – Lower-level offenses account for most cases in the juvenile justice system • The proportion of referrals coming from schools has increased mostly due to truancy – Racial and gender disparities exist among complaints (in comparison to the general population) and grows as youth get deeper into the juvenile justice system – There is wide variation in whether counties’ share of complaints is consistent with their share of the youth population – Declines in detention have not kept pace with declines in complaints, and in some regions, detention admissions have increased • Nearly 300 youth are in detention on a given day, roughly the same as 2012 19 Overall Key Takeaways: System Assessment Presentation 1 • Youth Flow – 2/3 of complaints result in petitions, consistent with trends in 2006 • There is variation in how and to what extent counties use informal adjustments and consent decrees – The proportion of complaints that result in petitions varies by county – The length of informal adjustment/lecture & releases is up 61%; 15% last longer than 6 months 20 10

  11. Overall Key Takeaways: System Assessment Presentation 2 • Decision Making – Statute allows the court to impose any combination of dispositions or conditions for most youth – Disposition decision making is not informed by a risk and needs assessment statewide – The court has discretion to keep youth under its jurisdiction until they age out of the system, or for longer to repay financial obligations – Youth may be placed out-of-home or have any condition added for any violation of supervision – DYS is not required to use evidence-based services shown to reduce reoffending 21 Overall Key Takeaways: System Assessment Presentation 2 • Youth Flow – Probation dispositions and DYS commitments have declined more than 50% over the past decade – Racial disparities and gender disparities are present for all decision points and are largest for youth in the adult system – The median length of probation has more than doubled since 2009, despite the fact that the offense profile has not grown more serious • Nearly 1/3 of probation dispositions last longer than 3 years – Probation violations are growing as a share of DYS commitments and out-of-home diversion admissions – Most youth committed to DYS have not been given the opportunity to a non-residential DYS diversion prior to their first commitment – Out-of-home diversion programs cost the state 58% more than non- residential program on average – DYS out-of-home placements cost as much as $161,694 per youth per year, as much as 91 times the cost of probation 22 11

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend


More recommend